[eszed]

I think you're right, in general - certainly AI will replace background actors, though that's already been happening for years without AI generation. I'm also pretty sure that if/when AI can generate whole films, then that'll happen, too.

However, this statement is a hell of a lot better than I expected to see, and suggests to me that the actors' strike a few years ago was necessary and successful. It may, as you say, only be holding back the "capitalism problem" dike, but... At least it's doing that?

[hexage1814]

I would somewhat disagree with this statement being a sign the strike was a success because, like, AI is not at the point of generating a whole movie in human quality today, so Netflix issuing this statement like this now, in November 2025, costs them literally nothing, and feels more like a consolation prize: "Here, take this statement, so you guys can pretend the strike achieved anything."

When AI gets good enough, 2, 3, 5, 10 years from now, they simply reverse path, and this statement wouldn't delay Netflix embracing AI films that much, if anything.

> I would somewhat disagree with this statement being a sign the strike was a success because, like, AI is not at the point of generating a whole movie in human quality today, so Netflix issuing this statement like this now, in November 2025, costs them literally nothing, and feels more like a consolation prize: "Here, take this statement, so you guys can pretend the strike achieved anything."

>

> When AI gets good enough, 2, 3, 5, 10 years from now, they simply reverse path, and this statement wouldn't have delay Netflix embracing AI films that much, if anything.

[emp17344]

There’s no guarantee AI will get good enough to replace anyone. We’ve pretty much run out of training data at this point. I’m a little annoyed that people speak about future progress like it’s an inevitability.